1. - Top - End - #1182
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real World Weapons or Armour Question? Mk XI

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    Equipment of Medieval Armies 12th - 14th Century
    By this era, medieval armies were notably different from the 'early medieval' or migration era armies which the Romans were familiar with. The main difference was the dominance and power of the heavy cavalry. The invading Crusader armies entering Anatolia and the Middle East in the 11th Century were a shock to the Byzantines for several reasons. They had developed better armor, either due to advances in iron working technology, armor design, or to the textile component or for some other reason we don't know, but the Byzantines reported shock at the effectiveness of the 'Frankish' mail panoply.

    The European barbarians had improved technology and tactics for heavy cavalry considerably. This may have hinged mainly on changes to saddle design as well as horse breeding. Or it may have been better stirrups or some other reason. Whatever the cause, the "Frankish" (i.e. European) heavy cavalry caused a major shock to the Byzantines, and more so to the Turks, both of whom noted that in spite of the first Crusade being often (though not always) a poorly organized rabble, small numbers of Frankish cavalry were routinely routing much larger cavalry forces of their enemies, even though at this point it seems that their horses were still mostly unarmored or lightly armored.

    A classic example of this is the Siege of Antioch, which historians are still somewhat at a loss to explain (I've seen explanations from everything to the discovery of the 'holy lance' to the idea that the European stallions were excited by the Arab mares... but the truth is simpler. Good cavalry with good leadership - plus trouble on the other side)
    Some of this "shock" must have been over-exaggerated by the writers themselves, because the Byzantines were very familiar with the Normans and others prior to the crusades, both from employing them as mercenaries against the Turks and in their wars with Robert Guiscard. Either that, or there was a sudden technological revolution in the space of a few short years. Part of it may be the audience that they were writing for, who might perhaps not have been familiar with contemporary military matters at all, or else stylistic choices (Anna Komena for example was purposefully writing in a very archaic style, sort of neo-classical, which is why she chooses old terminology for describing the western Europeans).

    At Antioch, there was a dearth of cavalry on the crusader side when they sallied out, so it is probably also a good example of their worth as foot soldiers.
    Last edited by Matthew; 2013-04-01 at 07:59 AM.
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)